On the Interpretation of Assurance Case Arguments

被引:2
作者
Rushby, John [1 ]
机构
[1] SRI Int, Comp Sci Lab, 333 Ravenswood Ave, Menlo Pk, CA 94025 USA
来源
NEW FRONTIERS IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE | 2017年 / 10091卷
关键词
D O I
10.1007/978-3-319-50953-2_23
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
An assurance case provides a structured argument to establish a claim for a system based on evidence about the system and its environment. I propose a simple interpretation for the overall argument that uses epistemic methods for its evidential or leaf steps and logic for its reasoning or interior steps: evidential steps that cross some threshold of credibility are accepted as premises in a classical deductive interpretation of the reasoning steps. Thus, all uncertainty is located in the assessment of evidence. I argue for the utility of this interpretation.
引用
收藏
页码:331 / 347
页数:17
相关论文
共 27 条
[1]  
Adams E. W., 1998, A primer of probability logic
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1951, Biometrika
[3]  
[Anonymous], ENG SYSTEMS SAFETY
[4]  
[Anonymous], THESIS
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1996, AER REC PRACT ARP 47
[6]  
Bovens L., 2003, Bayesian epistemology
[7]  
Dawid A.P., 2002, BAYESS THEOREM, P71
[8]   Towards Measurement of Confidence in Safety Cases [J].
Denney, Ewen ;
Pai, Ganesh ;
Habli, Ibrahim .
2011 FIFTH INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM ON EMPIRICAL SOFTWARE ENGINEERING AND MEASUREMENT (ESEM 2011), 2011, :380-383
[9]   Ceteris-paribus lost [J].
Earman, J ;
Roberts, J ;
Smith, S .
ERKENNTNIS, 2002, 57 (03) :281-301
[10]  
Earman John., 1992, Bayes or Bust? A Critical Examination of Bayesian Confirmation Theory